Crinodes insularis Rothschild, 1917

Cock, Matthew J. W., 2021, A new species and taxonomic changes relating to the Notodontidae (Lepidoptera) of Trinidad, West Indies, Zootaxa 5020 (2), pp. 307-327 : 310-313

Crinodes insularis Rothschild, 1917 stat. nov. ( Notodontidae ¸ Dudusinae )

( Figs. 4–6 )

Rothschild (1917) described insularis from Trinidad as a subspecies of C. striolata Schaus, 1901 , and referred to ten specimens, at that time in the Tring Museum, which are now in the NHMUK. Schintlmeister (2013) treated insularis as a subspecies of C. guatemalena Druce, 1887 (in Druce 1881 –1900) but I have not located any published taxonomic act for this combination. Subsequently, Becker (2014) reverted to treating insularis as a subspecies of C. striolata , again with no formal taxonomic act.

Crinodes striolata Schaus was described from eastern Brazil (Pernambuco), and is now considered to be restricted to eastern and southern Brazil, northern Argentina and Paraguay ( Schintlmeister 2019). Crinodes fuscipennis Rothschild, 1917 and C. insularis were considered to be subspecies of C. striolata by Becker (2014), but Schintlmeister (2019) raised C. fuscipennis to species status, giving its distribution as widespread in South America, including Trinidad, and made ssp. insularis a synonym of C. fuscipennis .

Trinidad material in MJWC was identified as ssp. insularis by visual comparison with the Trinidad type series, including the male specimen that was labelled as ‘type’ in NHMUK. Schintlmeister (2019) does not state whether this was the syntype specimen he designated as lectotype, which I have not specifically examined. Additional Trinidad material in MJWC was identified as C. fuscipennis from Schintlmeister (2019). Rothschild (1917) indicated that C. insularis differs from the nominate subspecies of C. striolata (which closely resembles C. fuscipennis in wing colour and markings) ‘in being suffused with dark brownish cinnamon which gives it a washed-out appearance’. Schintlmeister (2019) considered this to be within the range of variation of mainland C. fuscipennis . The wing markings of insularis and fuscipennis are more or less identical in pattern, but in addition to the washed-out effect, the extent of the dark discal and postdiscal striations is reduced in insularis , and the pale basal area that extends along the costa is a much stronger contrast to the adjacent dark brown post basal area in insularis . Both forms fly together in Trinidad and are sometimes caught together (author’s unpublished data; Fig. 4 ). However, having reared a small group of caterpillars in 1978, which all produced adults of ssp. insularis ( Cock 2003) , I suspected that two closely related Crinodes species occur in Trinidad.

Dissections of the terminalia of males of typical C. fuscipennis from Trinidad and specimens resembling insularis ( Figs. 5 , 6 ) show small but clear differences between them. The divide in the posterior margin of the A8 sternite is short and rounded in material matching C. fuscipennis whereas it is longer, and narrowly acute in material matching insularis . The dissections of C. fuscipennis illustrated by Schintlmeister (2019, Figs. 16a, 16d ) have this split short (like Trinidad fuscipennis ), but acute (more like Trinidad insularis ). A more striking and significant difference is in the arrangement of the basal ventral projections of the gnathos, which Schintlmeister (2019) refers to as the gnathoi (robust, pointed spines, placed distally) and socii (strongly serrated portion, on a stalk, placed basally). In C. fuscipennis , the basal portions of the socii are at right angles to the gnathos, columnar and widening slightly distally; the distal serrated portion of the socii is parallel to the gnathos and nearly touching the apex of the gnathoi ( Fig. 5 C ). In C. insularis , the basal portions of the socii are inclined anteriorly relative to the gnathos, and distally there is a strong bulge on the posterior margin; the serrated portion of the socii is at an angle to the gnathos and the posterior end is level with the base of the socii and distant from the apex of the gnathoi ( Fig. 6 E ). The socii are rigid and not articulated, and the fact that the gnathoi and socii are the most heavily chitinised part of the male terminalia suggests that their structure is important for copulation. These characters are clearly visible in lateral view, but it is not possible to judge them in the slide-mounted preparations examined and illustrated by Schintlmeister (2019), as these structures are flattened and distorted. Based on these differences, I consider C. insularis stat. nov. to be a valid species, distinct from C. fuscipennis . When DNA barcodes are available for both, this conclusion should be tested.

Crinodes insularis is an occasional species in both forested and suburban areas of Trinidad. The fact that Schintlmeister (2019) mentions this form occurring within the range of variation of mainland C. fuscipennis suggests that C. insularis may prove to be more widespread. Neither species is known from Tobago ( Cock 2017).

Trinidad material examined. Crinodes insularis . [Arima Valley], St. Pat [rick]s: ♀ 25.v.1948 [N. Lamont] [ UWIZM.2013.13.1791]. Arima Valley, Simla, at light: 2♂ 24.iv.1981 (M.J.W. Cock) [ MJWC, dissection 1017]; UWIZM CABI.1472]; ♀ 2.v.1981 (M.J.W. Cock) [ MJWC]; 2♂, 2♀ 4.vi.1995 (M. Morais) [ UWIZM CABI.1474, 1478, 1491, 1494]. Curepe, at light: ♀ 3.vi.1979 (M.J.W.Cock) [ NHMUK]; ♂ 18–31.v.1982 (M.J.W. Cock) [ UWIZM CABI.1485]; ♀ 28.v.1982 (F.D. Bennett) [ UWIZM CABI.1496]. Maracas Valley: ♀ collected as caterpillar on indet. vine [ Gouania sp. ], 25.vi.1978 (M.J.W. Cock) [ MJWC]. Morne Bleu, Textel Installation, at light: ♀ 14.vii.1989 (R.G. Brown & T. Cassie) [ UWIZM CABI.1499]. Port of Spain, Belmont: 3♂, 2♀ (E. Lafond) [ NHMUK]. St. Ann’s : ♂ [ NHMUK, type of C. striolata insularis ]. Trinidad, ‘ S.P. ’ [this does not represent any obvious locality and may refer to a collector]: ♂ 1.vi.1949 [N. Lamont] [ UWIZM.2013.13.1789] .

Crinodes fuscipennis . Arima Valley, Simla , at light: 3♂, ♀ 24.iv.1981 (M.J.W. Cock) [ MJWC, dissection 1016]; 2♂, ♀ UWIZM CABI.1470, 1475, 1500]; ♂, 2♀ 2.v.1981 (M.J.W. Cock) [♂ UWIZM CABI.1473; ♀ MJWC; ♀ UWIZM CABI.1497] 9♂, 3♀ 4.vi.1995 (M. Morais) [ UWIZM CABI.1476, 1477, 1480–1484, 1487, 1489, 1490, 1492, 1493, 1495]. Curepe, at light: ♂ 16.vi.1979 (M.J.W. Cock) [ UWIZM CABI.1479]. Curepe, MVL: ♂ 1.x.1979 (M.J.W. Cock) [ UWIZM CABI.1469]; 2♂ 25.v.1982 (F.D. Bennett) [ UWIZM CABI.1471, 1486]. Morne Bleu, Textel Installation, at light: ♀ 14.vii.1989 (R.G. Brown & T. Cassie) [ UWIZM CABI.1498]. Palmiste: ♂ 1.vi.1949 [N. Lamont] [ UWIZM.2013.13.1790]

Figures

FIGURE 4. Adults of Crinodes fuscipennis and C. insularis from Trinidad; in each case, the dorsal view is shown above and the ventral view below. Crinodes fuscipennis ♂ Arima Valley, Simla, at light, 24.iv.1981 (MJWC, dissection 1016); C. fuscipennis ♀ Arima Valley, Simla, MVL trap, 2.v.1981; C. insularis ♂, as C. fuscipennis ♂; C. insularis ♀ as C. fuscipennis ♀.

FIGURE 5. Male terminalia of Crinodes fuscipennis, Trinidad, Arima Valley, Simla, at light, 24.iv.1981 (MJWC, dissection 1016). A, dorsal view. B, lateral view. C, enlargement of B. D, ventrolateral view. E, ventral view. F, aedeagus, lateral view. G, aedeagus, ventral view. H, A8 tergite (right) and sternite (left). All to scale shown (i.e. x6), except C enlarged from B.

FIGURE 6. Male terminalia of Crinodes insularis, Trinidad,Arima Valley, Simla, at light, 24.iv.1981 (MJWC dissection 1017). A, dorsal view. B, ventral view. C, dorsolateral view. D, enlargement of C. E, lateral view. F, A8 tergite (left) and sternite (right). G, aedeagus, lateral view. H, aedeagus, dorsolateral view. I, aedeagus, dorsal view. All to scale shown (i.e. x6), except D enlarged from C.

FIGURE 16. Skaphita indirae sp. nov. holotype, life size and enlarged, with an inset indicating the main markings of the dorsal forewing.